Related trials
RE-NOVATE 2, 2010 - dabigatran 220mg vs enoxaparin
ADVANCE 2 (CV185-047), 2010 - apixaban vs enoxaparin
WATCH (warfarin vs aspirin), 2009 - warfarin vs aspirin
RECORD 4, 2009 - rivaroxaban vs enoxaparin
RE-MOBILIZE (150mg), 2008 - dabigatran 150mg vs enoxaparin
RECORD 3, 2008 - rivaroxaban vs enoxaparin
RECORD 2, 2008 - extended rivaroxaban vs enoxaparin
RE-MOBILIZE (220mg), 2008 - dabigatran 220mg vs enoxaparin
ADVANCE-1, 2008 - apixaban vs enoxaparin
RECORD 1, 2008 - extended rivaroxaban vs extended enoxaparin
RE-NOVATE (220mg), 2007 - dabigatran 220mg vs enoxaparin
RE-MODEL (220mg), 2007 - dabigatran 220mg vs enoxaparin
RE-NOVATE (150mg), 2007 - dabigatran 150mg vs enoxaparin
RE-MODEL (150mg), 2007 - dabigatran 150mg vs enoxaparin
HELAS (warfarin vs aspirin), 2006 - warfarin vs aspirin
ODIXa-HIP 10mg, 2006 - rivaroxaban vs enoxaparin
HELAS (warfarin vs placebo), 2006 - warfarin vs placebo
ODIXa-KNEE, 2005 - rivaroxaban vs enoxaparin
BISTRO II (225mg bid), 2005 - dabigatran 450mg vs enoxaparin
NASPEAF (triflusal+coumadin medium dose vs triflusal), 2004 - triflusal+coumadin medium dose vs triflusal
NASPEAF (triflusal + coumadin medium dose vs coumadin standard dose), 2004 - triflusal+coumadin medium dose vs coumadin standard dose
WASH (aspirin), 2004 - aspirin vs no treatment
WASH (warfarin), 2004 - warfarin vs no treatment
PATAF (coumadin low dose vs coumadin standard dose), 1999 - coumadin low dose vs coumadin standard dose
AFASAK II (warfarin low dose vs warfarin standard dose), 1998 - warfarin low dose vs warfarin standard dose
See also:
All heart failure clinical trials
All clinical trials of antithrombotics
All clinical trials of warfarin
|
|
Treatments
Studied treatment |
warfarin
|
Control treatment |
aspirin 325mg/d
|
Patients
Patients |
HF related to ischemic heart disease with LVFE<35% |
Baseline characteristics |
Age (years) |
61.6y |
female (%) |
89.3% |
LVEF (mean), % |
29.0% |
ACE Inhibitors/ARB |
56.9% |
Diuretics |
56.2% |
Digitalis |
37.7% |
B-blockers |
15.1% |
|
Method and design
Randomized effectives |
54 / 61 (studied vs. control) |
Design |
Parallel groups |
Blinding |
Double blind |
Follow-up duration |
21.9 months |
Lost to follow-up |
ND |
Number of centre |
40 |
Geographic area |
Europe |
Primary endpoint |
stroke, PE, ME, hospitalisation, death |
Withdrawals (T1/T0) |
ND / |
Results
Endpoint
Studied treat. n/N
Control treat. n/N
Graph
RR [95% CI]
exacerbation of heart failure
2 / 54
3 / 61
classic
0,75 [0,13;4,34]
All cause death
11 / 54
9 / 61
classic
1,38 [0,62;3,08]
0
2
1.0
Relative risks
|
Endpoint |
Events (%) |
Relative Risk |
95% CI |
Endpoint definition in the trial |
Ref |
Studied treat. |
Control treat. |
exacerbation of heart failure
|
2 / 54 (3,7%) |
3 / 61 (4,9%) |
0,75 |
[0,13;4,34] |
|
|
All cause death
|
11 / 54 (20,4%) |
9 / 61 (14,8%) |
1,38 |
[0,62;3,08] |
|
|
The primary endpoint (if exists) appears in blod characters
|
Reference(s) used for data extraction:
|
Endpoint |
studied treat. |
control treat. |
mean diff |
Absolute risk reduction
|
Endpoint |
Events rate |
Absolute risk reduction (ARR) |
Studied treat. |
Control treat. |
exacerbation of heart failure |
3,70% |
4,92% |
-12,1‰
|
All cause death |
20,37% |
14,75% |
5,6%
|
Meta-analysis of all similar trials:
antithrombotics in heart failure for all type of patients
Reference(s)
-
Cokkinos DV, Haralabopoulos GC, Kostis JB, Toutouzas PK.
Efficacy of antithrombotic therapy in chronic heart failure: the HELAS study..
Eur J Heart Fail 2006 Jun;8:428-32
Pubmed
|
Hubmed
| Fulltext
|